Fujii Masao wrote:
> ***************
> *** 829,834 **** if (!triggered)
> --- 826,834 ----
> <para>
> Set the maximum number of concurrent connections from the standby servers
> (see <xref linkend="guc-max-wal-senders"> for details).
> + Since those connections are for superusers,
> + <xref linkend="guc-superuser-reserved-connections"> should be
> + set accordingly.
> </para>
> </listitem>
> <listitem>
That's an interesting point, do streaming replication connections
consume superuser_reserved_connections slots? How should
superuser_reserved_connections be set?
> *** a/src/backend/access/transam/recovery.conf.sample
> --- b/src/backend/access/transam/recovery.conf.sample
> ***************
> *** 88,94 ****
> #recovery_target_timeline = '33' # number or 'latest'
> #
> #---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ! # LOG-STREAMING REPLICATION PARAMETERS
> #---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> #
> # When standby_mode is enabled, the PostgreSQL server will work as
> --- 88,94 ----
> #recovery_target_timeline = '33' # number or 'latest'
> #
> #---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ! # STANDBY SERVER PARAMETERS
> #---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> #
> # When standby_mode is enabled, the PostgreSQL server will work as
Hmm, that makes the HOT STANDBY notice after that section look weird:
> #---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> # HOT STANDBY PARAMETERS
> #---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> #
> # Hot Standby related parameters are listed in postgresql.conf
> #
> #---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do we need that notice? Maybe just move that sentence to the "STANDBY
SERVER PARAMETERS" section.
I just committed a patch to move around the high-availability sections a
bit. That caused conflicts with this patch, so I picked the changes from
the patch and applied them over the new layout, and I also did a lot of
other editing. So, I committed most parts of this patch (except the
above), with a lot of changes to fix the bit-rot, and also other editing
to my liking. I hope I made it better not worse.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com